From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.org/gmane.linux.lib.musl.general/5571 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Rich Felker Newsgroups: gmane.linux.lib.musl.general Subject: Re: Locale bikeshed time Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 18:12:12 -0400 Message-ID: <20140723221212.GE11570@brightrain.aerifal.cx> References: <20140722184932.GA4914@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <53CEC6EE.9030404@skarnet.org> <20140722203648.GB11570@brightrain.aerifal.cx> <53D03114.4010804@skarnet.org> Reply-To: musl@lists.openwall.com NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1406153553 23011 80.91.229.3 (23 Jul 2014 22:12:33 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Jul 2014 22:12:33 +0000 (UTC) To: musl@lists.openwall.com Original-X-From: musl-return-5576-gllmg-musl=m.gmane.org@lists.openwall.com Thu Jul 24 00:12:27 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org Original-Received: from mother.openwall.net ([195.42.179.200]) by plane.gmane.org with smtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XA4lt-00017q-Gc for gllmg-musl@plane.gmane.org; Thu, 24 Jul 2014 00:12:25 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 28323 invoked by uid 550); 23 Jul 2014 22:12:24 -0000 Mailing-List: contact musl-help@lists.openwall.com; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: Original-Received: (qmail 28315 invoked from network); 23 Jul 2014 22:12:24 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <53D03114.4010804@skarnet.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) Original-Sender: Rich Felker Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.linux.lib.musl.general:5571 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 11:03:00PM +0100, Laurent Bercot wrote: > On 22/07/2014 21:36, Rich Felker wrote: > >Do you have in mind a usage case this would be beneficial for? > > Not particularly - again, I'm far from a locale expert. But you > seem reluctant to reuse LOCPATH for mixed musl+glibc installations, > and also reluctant to break an established convention, so having I was not reluctant to break established convention here, but reluctant to add new variables systems integrators and administrators need to be aware of (for the sake of preserving them or filtering them). But I think the alternative is worse. > both would cater to all use cases - LOCPATH for the principle of > least surprise and general use, and MUSL_LOCPATH for people who > know what they are doing and need a different variable. I'm not seeing a way that setting LOCPATH without being aware that the app you're trying to affect is using musl could be helpful. The locales you're trying to make visible to the app need to be in the format used by musl, not the glibc format, so you have to already be aware of this. Maybe there's something I'm not seeing -- this is why I asked -- but if there's no reason for it, I think searching both "just because" is bad. Rich